Back in mid-2008, I wrote extensively of an explosive Obama videotape that was being withheld from the public by the LA Times. At an anti-Israel dinner for notorious Jew-hater Rashid Khalidi, Obama was said to have declared, “Israel has no God-given right to occupy Palestine,” plus, there’s been “genocide against the Palestinian people by Israelis.” A $150,000 reward was offered for the videotape. And still the LA Times refused to release the videotape, despite the national security concerns. The rest is history. Obama was elected.

Now again, another videotape that would expose Obama for who and what he is, is being suppressed.

Pam Dickler, director of the 1998 production of The Love Song of Saul Alinsky in Chicago that included a panel discussion featuring then-State Sen. Barack Obama, has a videotape of the play. Andrew Breitbart wrote in his last column before his sudden passing:

In 1998, a small Chicago theater company staged a play titled The Love Song of Saul Alinsky, dedicated to the life and politics of the radical community organizer whose methods Obama had practiced and taught on Chicago’s South Side.

Obama was not only in the audience, but also took the stage after one performance, participating in a panel discussion that was advertised in the poster for the play.

“There is only one archive tape of the play and I have it,” Dickler informed our source. “It is not in Chicago.” Dickler told our source that she doesn’t believe she’s ever watched the tape, and she doesn’t know if it “can be viewed.” But she added: “No one is going to see the tape.”

She said she felt “very protective over it … due to all of the interest from conservatives recently.” She also told our source that the poster for the play was never supposed to be distributed.

Dickler added that there were no transcripts of the panel discussion.

“They didn’t know he was going to go on to become the president,” she said. “If they had known that, they would have of course kept any transcripts, but there were never any taken.”

Mainstream journalists have attempted to dismiss yesterday's column by Andrew Breitbart about the play by claiming that Obama had merely attended the production--a defense hinted at by Chicago Reader columnist Michael Miner's initial column.

However--as even Miner noted--Obama did not merely attend the play; he was featured on the poster and in the panel discussion that followed.

So, if the play’s so harmless, why are Obama’s allies hiding it?

Why not release the video tape?

And here is more on the LA Times video they still refuse to release. Excerpt of Atlas 2008:

They know not what they do. What is fascinating to me is that the important, Jewish powerhouses in Hollywood are not stepping up to the plate and demanding that the LA Times release the video or they will pull their entertainment advertising.

I am talking about men like Steven Spielberg, who spent a large part of his fortune and career recording every witness to the Shoah. Fetishizing dead Jews. Someone ought to tell Spielberg (and Geffen, Katzenberg, all of them) that his efforts are worthless if he has a hand in ushering in a President lethal for Israel and the Jews.

It was one thing for these guys to come out for Obama back in January 2007, when he was unknown. He is no longer unknown. Wright, Zbigniew, Farrakhan, Mansour, Powers, Rice, Ayers, et al. His allegiances are dangerous and fatal. You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Movie moguls Steven Spielberg, David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg (along with Soros of course) chose Barack Hussein Obama, imposed him on the American people. They messed up. Big time.

CHICAGO -- It was a celebration of Palestinian culture -- a night of music, dancing and a dash of politics. Local Arab Americans were bidding farewell to Rashid Khalidi, an internationally known scholar, critic of Israel and advocate for Palestinian rights, who was leaving town for a job in New York.

A special tribute came from Khalidi's friend and frequent dinner companion, the young state Sen. Barack Obama. Speaking to the crowd, Obama reminisced about meals prepared by Khalidi's wife, Mona, and conversations that had challenged his thinking.

His many talks with the Khalidis, Obama said, had been "consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases. . . . It's for that reason that I'm hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation -- a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid's dinner table," but around "this entire world."

[...]

And yet the warm embrace Obama gave to Khalidi, and words like those at the professor's going-away party, have left some Palestinian American leaders believing that Obama is more receptive to their viewpoint than he is willing to say.

Their belief is not drawn from Obama's speeches or campaign literature, but from comments that some say Obama made in private and from his association with the Palestinian American community in his hometown of Chicago, including his presence at events where anger at Israeli and U.S. Middle East policy was freely expressed.

At Khalidi's 2003 farewell party, for example, a young Palestinian American recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, "then you will never see a day of peace."

One speaker likened "Zionist settlers on the West Bank" to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been "blinded by ideology."

Obama adopted a different tone in his comments and called for finding common ground. But his presence at such events, as he worked to build a political base in Chicago, has led some Palestinian leaders to believe that he might deal differently with the Middle East than either of his opponents for the White House.

"I am confident that Barack Obama is more sympathetic to the position of ending the occupation than either of the other candidates," said Hussein Ibish, a senior fellow for the American Task Force on Palestine, referring to the Israeli presence in the West Bank and Gaza Strip that began after the 1967 war. More than his rivals for the White House, Ibish said, Obama sees a "moral imperative" in resolving the conflict and is most likely to apply pressure to both sides to make concessions.

Comments

Another Obama Videotape Has Surfaced, Now Suppressed Truth, Again, Hidden from the Public

Back in mid-2008, I wrote extensively of an explosive Obama videotape that was being withheld from the public by the LA Times. At an anti-Israel dinner for notorious Jew-hater Rashid Khalidi, Obama was said to have declared, “Israel has no God-given right to occupy Palestine,” plus, there’s been “genocide against the Palestinian people by Israelis.” A $150,000 reward was offered for the videotape. And still the LA Times refused to release the videotape, despite the national security concerns. The rest is history. Obama was elected.

Now again, another videotape that would expose Obama for who and what he is, is being suppressed.

Pam Dickler, director of the 1998 production of The Love Song of Saul Alinsky in Chicago that included a panel discussion featuring then-State Sen. Barack Obama, has a videotape of the play. Andrew Breitbart wrote in his last column before his sudden passing:

In 1998, a small Chicago theater company staged a play titled The Love Song of Saul Alinsky, dedicated to the life and politics of the radical community organizer whose methods Obama had practiced and taught on Chicago’s South Side.

Obama was not only in the audience, but also took the stage after one performance, participating in a panel discussion that was advertised in the poster for the play.

“There is only one archive tape of the play and I have it,” Dickler informed our source. “It is not in Chicago.” Dickler told our source that she doesn’t believe she’s ever watched the tape, and she doesn’t know if it “can be viewed.” But she added: “No one is going to see the tape.”

She said she felt “very protective over it … due to all of the interest from conservatives recently.” She also told our source that the poster for the play was never supposed to be distributed.

Dickler added that there were no transcripts of the panel discussion.

“They didn’t know he was going to go on to become the president,” she said. “If they had known that, they would have of course kept any transcripts, but there were never any taken.”

Mainstream journalists have attempted to dismiss yesterday's column by Andrew Breitbart about the play by claiming that Obama had merely attended the production--a defense hinted at by Chicago Reader columnist Michael Miner's initial column.

However--as even Miner noted--Obama did not merely attend the play; he was featured on the poster and in the panel discussion that followed.

So, if the play’s so harmless, why are Obama’s allies hiding it?

Why not release the video tape?

And here is more on the LA Times video they still refuse to release. Excerpt of Atlas 2008:

They know not what they do. What is fascinating to me is that the important, Jewish powerhouses in Hollywood are not stepping up to the plate and demanding that the LA Times release the video or they will pull their entertainment advertising.

I am talking about men like Steven Spielberg, who spent a large part of his fortune and career recording every witness to the Shoah. Fetishizing dead Jews. Someone ought to tell Spielberg (and Geffen, Katzenberg, all of them) that his efforts are worthless if he has a hand in ushering in a President lethal for Israel and the Jews.

It was one thing for these guys to come out for Obama back in January 2007, when he was unknown. He is no longer unknown. Wright, Zbigniew, Farrakhan, Mansour, Powers, Rice, Ayers, et al. His allegiances are dangerous and fatal. You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Movie moguls Steven Spielberg, David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg (along with Soros of course) chose Barack Hussein Obama, imposed him on the American people. They messed up. Big time.

CHICAGO -- It was a celebration of Palestinian culture -- a night of music, dancing and a dash of politics. Local Arab Americans were bidding farewell to Rashid Khalidi, an internationally known scholar, critic of Israel and advocate for Palestinian rights, who was leaving town for a job in New York.

A special tribute came from Khalidi's friend and frequent dinner companion, the young state Sen. Barack Obama. Speaking to the crowd, Obama reminisced about meals prepared by Khalidi's wife, Mona, and conversations that had challenged his thinking.

His many talks with the Khalidis, Obama said, had been "consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases. . . . It's for that reason that I'm hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation -- a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid's dinner table," but around "this entire world."

[...]

And yet the warm embrace Obama gave to Khalidi, and words like those at the professor's going-away party, have left some Palestinian American leaders believing that Obama is more receptive to their viewpoint than he is willing to say.

Their belief is not drawn from Obama's speeches or campaign literature, but from comments that some say Obama made in private and from his association with the Palestinian American community in his hometown of Chicago, including his presence at events where anger at Israeli and U.S. Middle East policy was freely expressed.

At Khalidi's 2003 farewell party, for example, a young Palestinian American recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, "then you will never see a day of peace."

One speaker likened "Zionist settlers on the West Bank" to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been "blinded by ideology."

Obama adopted a different tone in his comments and called for finding common ground. But his presence at such events, as he worked to build a political base in Chicago, has led some Palestinian leaders to believe that he might deal differently with the Middle East than either of his opponents for the White House.

"I am confident that Barack Obama is more sympathetic to the position of ending the occupation than either of the other candidates," said Hussein Ibish, a senior fellow for the American Task Force on Palestine, referring to the Israeli presence in the West Bank and Gaza Strip that began after the 1967 war. More than his rivals for the White House, Ibish said, Obama sees a "moral imperative" in resolving the conflict and is most likely to apply pressure to both sides to make concessions.